Cyrus_
Banned
posted 12-13-08 06:46 PM
CT (US)
1 / 13
i'd say it's case by case. nukes are a deterrent through MAD, meaning the big powers of the world can't attack eachother. at the same time if somebody gets a nuke who's not affected by MAD, they're extremely dangerous, like unlocalized terrorists or rouge states. I'm sure Kim Jong Ill wouldn't consider the destruction of North Korea a concern as long as he lived through it.
Murloc
Squire
posted 12-13-08 07:42 PM
CT (US)
4 / 13
I don't think iranians are so stupid to put the USA in condition to nuke them. They just want to show that they're uber 1337 and got the noobbomb like the other big boyz.
Murloc
Squire
posted 12-14-08 07:51 AM
CT (US)
7 / 13
yeah but extremists have to get their hands on a nuke and a big airplane first, and not be just boomed when flying over the ocean, which would destroy the schrimp- and fish- dependant nations, but not the humanity.
Murloc
Squire
posted 12-14-08 01:52 PM
CT (US)
11 / 13
Dirty bomb is good idea, but it won't destroy the world. It's a normal bomb with radioactive things, and doesn't cause any "if you hit me I hit you and we all suicide" reaction.
We speak about nuclear bombs, and they're not so easy to get.
Murloc
Squire
posted 12-15-08 01:07 PM
CT (US)
13 / 13
they are uber h4xx0r, they can learn how to handle them imho, but they can't get them and wouldn't have any chance to bring it over the usa.